On Aug 12, 2014, at 8:14 AM, Ant McWatt <[email protected]> wrote:

>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 7:38 PM, Ant McWatt wrote:
> 
> "It's a subtle SOM habit (certainly for a Westerner) to think of rocks and 
> trees and all the other inorganic & biological patterns as somehow being MORE 
> real than social & intellectual patterns but Northrop shows us this is 
> scientifically & logically incorrect.  This is why I think the MOQ 
> perspective - though unnatural at first for someone brought up in an SOM 
> dominated culture - is a more coherent and therefore BETTER one to hold."
> 
> http://moq.robertpirsig.org/
> 
> 
> Ron Kulp commented on the above, August 12th 2014:
> 
> "That's another useful term, to "hold" a perspective. In land surveying When 
> we try to give meaning to descriptions, we say we "Hold" certain physical and 
> abstract Evidence for particular reasons. Our reasons are subjected to peer
> And legal Review. Where am I going with this?"
> 
> "I guess I see a lot of similarities With orientation, when we hold 
> Particular values for particular reasons we orient the way we Think and 
> perceive, we lend a greater Broader meaning to the mosaic of Value in 
> experience. In boundary survey the term  "to hold" is an act Based on careful 
> reflection, the act Of reference or source of belief."
> 
> Ant McWatt comments:
> 
> Ron, I didn't know that land surveyors used that phrase "to hold" as well. 
> Interesting coincidence...  Anyway, I think a helpful way of looking at this 
> issue is to use the map analogies introduced by Ron DiSanto in the first 
> chapter of the "Guidebook to ZMM":
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/1990/11/26/books/books-of-the-times-retracing-the-tire-prints-on-a-philosophical-journey.html
> 
> 
> SOM is a particular map of the Human World, the MOQ is another one as is 
> Roman Catholicism, Atheism and the many other "isms" that people have 
> invented over the eons.  The MOQ is relatively a new map so (thanks to the 
> genius of its creator, Robert Pirsig) takes into account many aspects of the 
> contemporary world (from using technology to East Asian philosophy to the 
> nature of celebrity) that older maps DON'T take proper account of or, worse 
> still, miss all together.  
> 
> Does this make sense?
> 
> Ron:
Sure does, what I think I find most
Interesting is that the MOQ strikes
Me as a map makers guide also.
Just as in the mapping profession,
There are many kinds of maps used
For differing purposes.. I just notice
How heavy in philosophy the art of measure is steeped in my daily grind.
I don't get out much.
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                         
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html

Reply via email to